MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004567465 · doi:10.1186/1755-7682-6-45

Motor development of infants exposed to maternal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) but not infected

2013· article· en· W2004567465 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dafne Herrero, Paulo Rogério Gallo, Mahmi Fujimori, Carlos Bandeira de Mello Monteiro, Vítor Engrácia Valenti, Carlos Mendes Tavares, Sophia Motta Gallo, Cícero Cruz Macêdo, Adriana Gonçalves de Oliveira, Luíz Carlos de Abreu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Archives of Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de São Paulo
KeywordsMedicineAttendanceHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PediatricsEnvironmental healthPregnancyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To assess the motor development of infants exposed to maternal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). METHODS: Thirty infants were assessed in the period from November 2009 to March 2010 at the AIDS Reference and Training Centre, in São Paulo, Brazil. The assessment instrument used in the research was the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). All 30 infants used the antiretroviral drug properly for 42 consecutive days, in accordance with the protocol of the World Health Organization. RESULTS: Out of the total number of infants, 27 (90%) had proper motor performance and 3 (10%) presented motor delay, according to the AIMS. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated that only 10% of the assessed group had developmental delay and no relation with environmental variables was detected, such as maternal level of education, social and economic issues, maternal practices, attendance at the day care center, and drug use during pregnancy. It is important to emphasize the necessity of studies with a larger number of participants.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Archives of MedicineSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207